KVR Audio

superddman · Post by **superddman** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:15 am

I think they only break the workflow. The sequencers should just have all the required controls right on the arrange window, not separate mixer window.
A good example is Ableton Live. It has everything available infront of you.

What do you guys think?

Rellik · Post by **Rellik** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:19 am

I disagree.

Mixers allow you to control the levels on a group of instances/instruments, not just one.

Also, since mixing is such a sensitive process, I feel it's better to have it separated out into its own compartment so that you don't have to deal with the sequencing and all the different channels and midi and audio while doing your mixing/mastering.

braj · Post by **braj** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:28 am

Live has two views, one without the mixer

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:34 am

say you've programmed a drum beat using 30 single shot samples, and after you have them perfectly leveled with eachother you want to lower the level of the entire drum section? the mixer

superddman · Post by **superddman** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:35 am

Rellik wrote:I disagree.

Mixers allow you to control the levels on a group of instances/instruments, not just one.

Also, since mixing is such a sensitive process, I feel it's better to have it separated out into its own compartment so that you don't have to deal with the sequencing and all the different channels and midi and audio while doing your mixing/mastering.

For the first part, are you saying that this can only be done in a separate mixer window? If I understand correctly, it can be done easily in Ableton Live's arrange window, no need for separate mixer windows.

For mastering, it could be visually better to have a separate mixer, but for normal production I don't think it plays any advantage, only a drawback. Even for mastering if the controls are nicely positioned on the arrange window, it will be very easy to do so.

vurt · Post by **vurt** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:39 am

hey while were at it why do synths have guis with knobs n stuff?
surely we can just input the info in in text and have the whole thing done by the pc?

i think the idea of mixers is to give a view that is relevant when mixing

superddman · Post by **superddman** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:43 am

braj wrote:Live has two views, one without the mixer

Well, the session view doesn't even have to be opened once when doing a standard production, it is mainly designed for live preformance. I wouldn't even call it a mixer.

braj · Post by **braj** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:46 am

If you want a host without a mixer, try Tracktion. It's about as close as you'll get (though it really does have a mixer. You can tell yourself that it doesn't though if you like. It's OK.)

I personally like Tracktion's approach, I think a one-view GUI coupled with a hardware control surface of some sort is really the way to go.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:56 am

Chase wrote:say you've programmed a drum beat using 30 single shot samples, and after you have them perfectly leveled with eachother you want to lower the level of the entire drum section? the mixer

Submix.

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:08 am

JohnVulich wrote:
Chase wrote:say you've programmed a drum beat using 30 single shot samples, and after you have them perfectly leveled with eachother you want to lower the level of the entire drum section? the mixer
Submix.

Sorry I don't use LIVE

superddman · Post by **superddman** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:20 am

vurt wrote:hey while were at it why do synths have guis with knobs n stuff?
surely we can just input the info in in text and have the whole thing done by the pc?

i think the idea of mixers is to give a view that is relevant when mixing

Whats the difference between having a volume level beside the track then having it on a separate window? What advantage does that give you? It only slows you down, having to constantly switch to the mixer. I mean, in the arrange window, if everything is layed out nicely, won't it be as easy to do it on there?

If it's up to me, I rather be able to see what is happening in the song at all times and be able to adjust mixing parameters at the same time.

lion_cub · Post by **lion_cub** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:28 am

Interesting point, superddman.

TheMisterCat · Post by **TheMisterCat** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:34 am

Geez, if you're so concerned about it, move to Logic.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:34 am

Chase wrote:Sorry I don't use LIVE

You should damnit!

kilroy · Post by **kilroy** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:39 am

JohnVulich wrote:
Chase wrote:say you've programmed a drum beat using 30 single shot samples, and after you have them perfectly leveled with eachother you want to lower the level of the entire drum section? the mixer
Submix.

Some apps allow you to "shift" or "control" click a select number of tracks, and perform a syncronized fade using one of selected "track view" channel faders. For example, Vegas allows this without having to go to any mixer view.

Concerning virtual mixers...

superddman wrote:I think they only break the workflow. The sequencers should just have all the required controls right on the arrange window, not separate mixer window.

I tend to agree. My personal take is, that anything that can be *can* be performed in the track view, bleeding well should be. Being forced to go to a virtual mixer view when such a thing should not be necessary is, in my own opinion, a rather glaring design flaw.

On the other hand...

vurt wrote:I think the idea of mixers is to give a view that is relevant when mixing.

I can see this point as well. Some folks absolutely seem to require the inclusion of a way cool virtual mixer, or they are totally lost. That, and perhaps they just don't feel as hip mixing without one.

What's the point of mixers in software sequencers?